The centrist Danish government has announced that migrants will be immediately if convicted of a crime and sentenced to at least one year in prison.
In a press conference in Copenhagen on Friday, Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen hinted that her government may be willing to directly take on the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) and its associated court in Strasbourg, which has actively been stymieing deportation efforts by multiple governments across the continent.
The Danish PM said that legislation will be introduced to ensure that any migrant convicted of a crime and sentenced to at least one year in prison will face automatic removal from the country. Furthermore, those criminal aliens who fail to comply with the government will be fitted with a GPS anklet.
To spearhead the removal efforts, a dedicated deportation czar will be appointed by the government, public broadcaster DR reported.
“Some experts might think that we are breaking the Convention with this. We see it the other way around,” Freiderickson said.
Minister for Immigration and Integration, Rasmus Stoklund, added: “If it does happen that the courts reject Denmark, then we must respect that… Then we must take stock of the specific judgment and see whether it changes anything in general for our legislation, or whether it is the specific case where something special must be done by a Danish court.”
Denmark, along with Giorgia Meloni’s government in Italy, has been at the forefront of the move to reform the ECHR. In December, 27 ECHR nations, including the United Kingdom, which remains bound by the Convention despite Brexit as it is technically a separate institution, signed a joint letter calling for the curtailment of excuses to prevent deportation of foreign criminals.
Under the ECHR, migrant criminals, and even some terrorists, can appeal their deportation over the prospect of facing “torture, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, irrespective of the victim’s conduct” in their homelands.
There have been reports that have alleged that migrants facing removal will fake being homosexual to claim that they may suffer discrimination in their native country.
Meanwhile, Article 8 of the ECHR, which guarantees a “right to private and family life”, is also often used in appeals against deportations. For example, in 2024 an Indian man was jailed for distributing child pornography, but was not removed from Britain after his lawyers successfully argued it would harm the pedophile’s children if separated from their father.
In addition to ramping up deportations, Denmark has said that it will look to re-open its embassy in Syria in a bid to force Damascus into finally accepting the return of its asylum seekers. Other EU nations such as Germany are also attempting to begin large-scale deportations to Syria now that the civil war is over.
Randy Andy creeping over a woman laying down on the floor – Epstein files/DOJ
How low can Andrew go?
The three and a half million documents from the latest – and apparently last – release from the DOJ following the approval of the House Resolution 4405, the Epstein Files Transparency Act, are out.
Around the world, journalists are digging into the mother lode, but we can already say that disgraced former British Prince Andrew is the elite figure most featured in the damaging files.
We already reported about a 2010 email exchange in which Jeffrey Epstein, fresh out of Florida prison, sets ‘Randy Andy’ with a 26-year-old Russian woman, once again shattering the former duke’s lies that he severed ties with the late pedophile after his conviction.
He is also featured inviting Epstein and women friends for a dinner at Buckingham Palace – ‘with lots of privacy’.
The new revelations are even worse.
In a disturbing series of declassified photos, Andrew is ‘hovering over a woman lying on the floor’.
Randy Andy touching a woman laying down on the floor – Epstein files/DOJ
“In one disturbing photo, Queen Elizabeth II’s third child, now known as Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, is seen crouched on all fours over a woman — whose face is redacted — sprawled on her back with her arms spread on the white striped carpet, as the ousted royal stares into the camera.
Two other snaps show the barefoot 65-year-old, sporting a white polo and jeans, touching the unknown woman’s stomach. The woman appeared to be awake in the photos, with her arm held up in one picture.”
A series of emails between Andrew and convicted sex-trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell reinforce the multiple earlier reports that they were, at one point, romantically involved.
“Affectionate exchanges in which they refer to each other by names including ‘darling’ and ‘sweet pea’, while stating they ‘long for’ one another are reigniting claims from friends and even a former royal protection officer that they were in fact lovers.
[…] Emails between Andrew, 65, – who went by the moniker The Invisible Man – and Maxwell in 2002 tell how he sought Maxwell’s ‘permission’ to spend time with his ex-wife and children instead of travelling to the US.”
from Andrew to Maxwell – Epstein files/DOJ
from Andrew to Maxwell – Epstein files/DOJ
And to prove that shady deals come hand in hand with their debauched lifestyle, Andrew is also featured in the documents sharing confidential Afghanistan documents with Epstein.
The Telegraph reported:
“Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor appeared to ask Jeffrey Epstein for his advice over a confidential document about investment opportunities Afghanistan.
He told his former friend that he would be ‘very interested’ in his comments, views or ideas and who else he could show it to in order to ‘attract some interest’.
The Gates Foundation, he added, ‘sadly’ doesn’t do anything in Afghanistan.”
“On Christmas Eve, 2010, after Andrew, a UK trade ambassador at the time, was seen with Epstein in New York — a meeting he later told Newsnight had been to break off the friendship — he appears to have written to Epstein outlining a business opportunity in Afghanistan and shared a “confidential brief” about “Afghanistan International business opportunities”.”
🔺UPDATE: Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor appeared to ask Jeffrey Epstein for his advice on a confidential document about investment opportunities in Helmand, Afghanistanhttps://t.co/lqvkjPyKhb
Nail down those cafeteria dishes, students now steal them all: ‘ It is precisely these small, daily manifestations of institutional decay that pose the greatest long-term threat to our societies—far greater, in fact, than the dramatic events that dominate cable news cycles.AI Photo Generator
At first glance, a headline about the University of Mainz removing french fries from its cafeteria menu seems trivial. The sort of minor administrative decision that might belong on a local announcement board rather than commanding the attention of serious observers. Yet I would argue that this small story reveals something profound about the state of social cohesion in contemporary Europe, and perhaps even serves as a canary in the coal mine for the future of our civilisation.
Here are the facts: The Mainz University student services organisation (Studierenden Werk Mainz) had procured 500 cake plates and 1,590 serving dishes for French fries to supply the university cafeteria. Within four weeks, 450 of the cake plates had disappeared. Of the serving dishes, only 100 remained in use, meaning roughly 1,490 had vanished. Faced with this massive attrition, the cafeteria made a decision: remove French fries from the menu entirely.
On the surface, one might ask what this has to do with geopolitical upheaval, energy security, or the great challenges facing the West. With American interest in Greenland and turmoil in major American cities dominating headlines, who has time to concern themselves with missing crockery in a German university? Yet I would submit that it is precisely these small, daily manifestations of institutional decay that pose the greatest long-term threat to our societies—far greater, in fact, than the dramatic events that dominate cable news cycles.
The Invisible Infrastructure of Civilisation
To understand why, we must examine a concept that has become central to understanding how societies function: Social capital. This term, popularised by American sociologist Robert Putnam in the late 1980s and early 1990s, describes the advantages that arise from social networks, norms, and mutual trust. Think of it as an invisible web of social relationships that enables people to cooperate, share resources, and achieve common goals.
Social capital is fundamentally different from other forms of capital precisely because it is invisible and self-enforcing. When you lend a tool to a trusted neighbour, you do not need to hire a lawyer or draw up a contract. Trust between you and your neighbour is sufficient. But this simplicity masks something crucial: The entire transactional cost structure of a society depends on the density of this trust. Where trust exists, transaction costs plummet. Where it erodes, costs spiral, as formal enforcement mechanisms must replace informal understanding.
Consider a practical example. If you cannot trust your neighbour to return what you lend, you face a choice: Either forgo the transaction entirely, or incur the legal expenses of contracts and potential enforcement. Yet both outcomes impose costs—not merely financial, but in terms of forgone cooperation and mutual benefit. Your neighbour might have improved his garden with the borrowed equipment, benefiting both of you. But without trust, that mutual gain never occurs.
This seemingly minor dynamic plays out across entire economies. When social capital is high, businesses can operate with handshake agreements and unwritten understandings. Supply chains function efficiently because parties can rely on each other’s commitment to fair dealing. Innovation accelerates because cooperation becomes frictionless. When social capital declines, the state must substitute formal rules, surveillance, and enforcement for what once came naturally.
The Paradox of Declining Participation
Putnam’s most famous work, “Bowling Alone” (2000), documents a profound shift in American civic life. In the 1950s and 1960s, Americans belonged to bowling leagues, service clubs, religious organisations, and civic associations at remarkable rates. These groups did more than organise leisure activities—they cultivated the social connections and shared norms that held society together. Yet over subsequent decades, participation in these institutions collapsed. Voting declined by 25 per cent. Attendance at public meetings fell by 40 to 50 per cent. Membership in civic organizations plummeted.
In Europe, we observe similar patterns. In rural areas, the situation has been slightly better—participation in volunteer fire brigades, local football clubs, and traditional organisations has remained more resilient. But in urban centres, particularly in Central and Western Europe, we see the same erosion of civic participation that Putnam documented in America. Fewer people attend church services. Union membership has declined. The dense networks of civic engagement that characterised the post war period are visibly fraying.
Putnam himself—no right-winger, and someone whose political sympathies generally align with the centre-left—made a sobering admission in a later essay titled “E Pluribus Unum.” He acknowledged that the increasing diversity of Western societies has contributed significantly to this decline in social capital. This is not to blame minorities or immigrants per se, but rather to observe that the transition from relatively homogeneous societies to genuinely plural ones has been accompanied by a breakdown in the implicit norms that previously held societies together. When communities consist of people with shared histories, similar reference points, and common expectations about how one behaves, the enforcement of social norms becomes largely self-sustaining. When that homogeneity fragments, however, the informal mechanisms that once bound society together begin to fray.
The Broken Windows Principle
Understanding the Mainz cafeteria story requires an examination of what criminologists call the “broken windows theory.” Introduced by James Q. Wilson and George L. Kelling in 1982, the theory posits a simple but powerful observation: Visible signs of disorder and norm violation encourage further disorder and norm violation. A broken window that goes unrepaired signals that no one cares, and consequently, breaking more windows costs little—morally or socially. The disorder escalates.
The most compelling illustration of this principle comes from a 1969 experiment conducted by psychologist Philip Zimbardo. He placed two identical, unlocked automobiles on the streets of New York City—one in the Bronx, a poor and chaotic neighbourhood, and another in Palo Alto, California, a wealthy suburb. In the Bronx, residents demolished the car within ten minutes, stealing parts and destroying the interior. In Palo Alto, by contrast, the car sat untouched for two weeks.
But here is where the experiment became truly revealing. When Zimbardo approached the Palo Alto car and smashed a window with a sledgehammer, creating a visible sign of damage, the behaviour changed dramatically. Within two hours, residents of that affluent neighbourhood began systematically dismantling the vehicle. The broken window—the visible violation of norms—had signalled something crucial: That no one was maintaining order, and therefore anything was permitted.
Returning to the Mainz cafeteria, the broken windows principle illuminates what has transpired. A few students began taking dishes and serving ware. Perhaps initially this was exceptional behaviour, the kind of petty theft that occurs in any large institution. But as students observed that others were doing so with impunity—that no one was enforcing the norm—the behaviour cascaded. Within weeks, 90 per cent of one category of dish had vanished and 95 per cent of serving dishes were missing.
The critical insight is that this is not primarily a story about poverty or desperation. These are university students in a wealthy European country. What transpired was not driven by necessity but by the erosion of the implicit understanding that one does not take public property—that there exists a norm against such behaviour, and that norm is collectively enforced.
The consequences of this norm collapse are not trivial. The university now has no option but to remove French fries from the menu, thereby degrading the quality and variety of the cafeteria offering. This is a loss of institutional service that did not result from fiscal constraints or supply chain disruptions, but from the failure of social trust. Alternatively, the university must implement surveillance mechanisms—barcodes on dishes, restricted access, cameras—all of which impose costs that could have been directed toward educational purposes.
This dynamic replicates across Western societies. In some cities, newspapers once sat in honour boxes on the street, with readers expected to deposit coins. Many of these systems have been dismantled because they could no longer function without complete breakdown of the honour system. Farmers’ markets that operated on trust—where customers could take products and leave payment—have largely disappeared, replaced by conventional retail with checkout points and cashiers. In supermarkets, items once freely accessible are now locked behind security displays. Razor blades and other commonly stolen items must be retrieved by staff.
Diversity, Social Trust, and the State
None of this is to deny that demographic change has played a role. When a significant portion of a community consists of individuals who did not grow up within the cultural context in which certain norms developed, the implicit understanding erodes. More significantly, if institutional authorities fail to enforce norms against new groups when they violate them, the incentive structure shifts for the rest of the population. If one observes that certain people can steal with impunity while others are expected to follow rules, the logical conclusion is: “If they are exempt from these norms, why should I conform?”
This dynamic has been documented repeatedly across Europe. In some neighbourhoods, the failure of authorities to enforce basic behavioural norms against certain newcomer populations has led to a phenomenon where native residents gradually abandon their own internal enforcement of those norms. The implicit standard shifts from “this is how we behave” to “apparently, rules do not apply anymore, so I might as well behave accordingly”.
The long-term consequence is inexorable: As informal social control—the invisible mechanisms by which people police their own behaviour based on shared understandings—erodes, the formal apparatus of state enforcement must expand. Knife bans. Alcohol-free zones. Increased surveillance. Random searches. All of these represent state substitutes for what once came naturally through dense networks of social cohesion.
The Stakes
Here lies the great paradox of modern liberal democracy. Genuine freedom—not merely the legal right to do as one wishes, but the lived experience of living safely in a community where one need not fear predation—depends entirely on widespread norm-following that occurs without explicit state coercion. A society where everyone “technically has the right” to attack their neighbours but is prevented only by omnipresent surveillance and overwhelming police force is not free. It is a surveillance state masquerading as freedom.
The exceptional success of Western European and East Asian societies over the past 75 years has rested on a particular achievement: the construction of societies where most citizens, most of the time, voluntarily conform to behavioural norms without requiring constant oversight. This allowed the state to remain relatively unobtrusive. Citizens could walk streets safely. Institutions could operate efficiently. Economic life could flourish because transaction costs remained low.
This achievement rested on historical foundations. In Northern Italy and Central Europe, civic traditions extending back to medieval free cities created deep reservoirs of social capital. In Japan, a particular constellation of cultural factors produced similarly high levels of trust and norm-adherence. In Germany, the post-war reconstruction—which rebuilt civil society deliberately—reinforced civic participation and mutual obligation.
But these were not inevitable achievements. As Putnam’s research on Southern Italy demonstrates, even within the same nation, regions with different historical trajectories of civic engagement developed radically different capacities for functional governance. Regions with long traditions of civic republicanism developed efficient administrations and robust economic performance. Regions with histories of feudalism and centralised authority—where the state was understood as the instrument of rulers, not of citizens—developed clientelist networks and endemic corruption.
The Warning Sign
I am acutely aware that dwelling on missing cafeteria dishes may seem like a peculiar preoccupation when major geopolitical crises demand attention. The headlines do matter. Yet I would contend that historians looking back on the early 21st century Western decline will not point primarily to these dramatic events. Rather, they will point to the small moments—the everyday erosion of the unwritten rules that held society together. Each broken norm, each small theft met with indifference, each moment when citizens observe others violating accepted rules without consequence, represents a micro-fracture in the social infrastructure.
Every great collapse begins with a crack. The Mainz cafeteria story is a crack—not the collapse itself, but a warning that the invisible foundations are weakening. The question is whether Western societies can recognize this signal and respond, or whether we will continue our slow march toward societies where formal enforcement replaces informal trust, where surveillance replaces civic participation, and where the state—increasingly intrusive and increasingly necessary—comes to regulate behaviour that once regulated itself.
That outcome would represent not a triumph of order, but a profound loss of what once made liberal democracies worth defending.
A rally against U.S. President Donald Trump in front of the National Assembly in Paris on January 28, 2026. Screengrab youtube
Progressives will be progressives, regardless of which continent they happen to live on. And they always seem to be on the side of those who despise law and order and never on the side of the ‘normies’ who bear the consequences of the normalization of lawlessness.
European liberal media are acting as the cohorts of the U.S. leftist press when it comes to covering the shameful incitement by progressive actors and the deranged attacks by protesters against ICE officials in Minnesota. Those responsible for the chaos are glorified, while those working to enforce the law and make the United States safer are regularly demonized.
Take the example of Alex Pretti, the man shot dead by an ICE agent after he showed up to a ‘protest’ armed and engaged in repeated physical altercations with law enforcement officials. Liberal Italian newspaper La Repubblicasaw fit to dedicate a whole article to the response of ‘solidarity’ of Italian nursing associations to the statement by the American Nurses Association, issued following the death of Pretti. According to La Repubblica, “The wave of indignation has now crossed the ocean and has arrived in Italy, too, concerning the murder (sic) of Alex Pretti … by ICE agents sent to Minnesota by Trump … Their Italian colleagues, shocked by the violence in the United States, have responded to the call … by the American Nursing Association for a full and transparent inquiry … They are also worried about the presence of ICE agents in Italy during the Olympic Games.” What on earth?
There is no point in looking for reporting in such media about the condition of the ICE agent who suffered internal bleeding after being rammed by Renée Good, the woman shot dead in an earlier incident in Minnesota. (Good is regularly referred to in the liberal media as “a mother of three.” No mention, meanwhile, of the family of the ICE agent, who are now apparently in hiding after they were doxed by leftist agitators.) There was (and still is) no trace of the same liberal media reporting on signallings of solidarity or “indignation” when Laken Riley, an Augusta nursing student, died at the hands of a Venezuelan illegal immigrant in 2024. On the contrary: the most important thing British leftist outlet The Guardian had to say about her murder was that “The killing of the 22-year-old nursing student Laken Riley on the campus of the University of Georgia on 22 February has drawn national media interest and political activity in ways that other homicide cases do not, in part because it provides an easy target for rightwing election sloganeering.” (italicized for emphasis)
No words of sympathy for the innocent victim whose life was taken by a person who should not have been in the United States to begin with.
Similarly shocking is the way the liberal media in Europe reported on the disruption of a church service in Minneapolis. No words of compassion for the churchgoers who were left in terror after the illegal occupation of their place of worship. No opinion, in fact, about whether it is normal and acceptable to march into a house of God and intimidate the worshippers. No: reporting on activist-posing-as-reporter Don Lemon, risen from irrelevance after taking part in the infamous storming of St. Paul United Methodist Church, finally being charged (arrested but then released) in the case for his participation in the shameful incident, French Liberation explains that the reason for the protest was that one of the pastors is an ICE agent—as if that is something that warrants violence! The same Liberation that earlier dedicated an entire article to describing ICE as an “opaque” institution that acts as “the armed arm of the Trump regime.”
As if this were not enough, most recently, the American and Western European progressive media have gotten themselves an unlikely competitor in the who-can-demonize-law-enforcement-better game. Telex.hu, a Hungarian liberal outlet posing as ‘independent’ but heavily financed by foreign foundations propped up by the European Commission, and earlier by the Biden administration, published an article the other day about Greg Bovino with the following headline: ”Downfall of the little Napoleon in a Nazi coat, the face of Trump’s deportations“
It is hard to decide whether this can be regarded as an exceptional low even by liberal journalism standards or hailed as a rare moment of sincerity that reveals the almost insane hatred of Trump and what he stands for. As MEP András László (Fidesz / Patriots) highlighted in his tweet, deportations in the U.S. are ”an issue that hardly concerns Hungarians and the majority is against illegal immigration and Hungary has no issues removing illegals because we don’t allow them in.”
This is what "independent media" in Hungary looks like.
‼️🇺🇸 Funded by US taxpayer money.
Article title reads: "Failed little Napoleon in his Nazi coat, the face of Trump's deportations". (Mind you, this is an issue that hardly concerns Hungarians and the majority is against… pic.twitter.com/C9WUfWnKen
Luckily, the Trump administration is having none of the liberal gaslighting and is determined to enforce immigration laws—which is what the American people elected the 47th president to do and what most Europeans would like to see happen on the Old Continent, too.
An Afghan national has admitted raping a 12-year-old girl in Nuneaton.
Ahmad Mulakhil pleaded guilty at Warwick Crown Court to one count of raping a child under the age of 13. He had previously denied the charge.
Mulakhil, 23 and of no fixed abode, also denied abducting a child, three counts of rape of a child under 13 and two counts of sexual assault of a child under 13.
He appeared alongside co-defendant Mohammad Kabir, 23, also of no fixed abode, and who denies attempting to take a child, aiding and abetting rape of a child under 13, and intentional strangulation of the girl. They are due to stand trial on 26 January.
The defendants, who Warwickshire Police previously confirmed were Afghan nationals, were aided by interpreters during the hearing in front of Judge Kristina Montgomery KC.
The offences are said to have taken place on 22 July.
Mr Kabir spoke only to confirm his name, while Mulakhil confirmed his name and entered his guilty plea when he was rearraigned on one count of rape.
Addressing the defendants in the dock, Judge Montgomery said: “You will both be produced before the court on December 12.
“On that occasion, there will be further directions made and the complainant witness in the case will be in attendance to be cross-examined.
“You should both reflect carefully on your position before that takes place.
“You are both remanded into custody.”
The allegations against the two men led to anti-immigration protests outside Nuneaton Town Hall on 9 August when St George’s Cross and Union flags were held and protesters chanted “stop the boats” and “we want our country back”.
Stand Up to Racism counter-protesters were significantly outnumbered outside the Nuneaton and Bedworth Borough Council offices.
Warwickshire County Council leader George Finch previously accused police and the Home Office of covering up the pair’s immigration status. Reform Party leader, Nigel Farage, also called for the Warwickshire force to release the information.
AI-generated image by Grok – Bill Gates, Jeffrey Epstein and Prince Andrew.
It’s an Epstein deluge.
And so, we’ve come to the point today where the DOJ has released no less than 3,5 million new documents from the Jeffrey Epstein Files, pursuant to the House Resolution 4405, the Epstein Files Transparency Act.
That’ll keep reporters all over the world busy for weeks or months to come, but the revelations are already coming in, hard and fast.
To begin with, a sleazy moment in 2010 where the disgraced financier sets up former Prince Andrew with a 26-year-old Russian woman, in the same year that the fallen royal told the Kingdom that he severed ties with Epstein.
Andrew and Epstein’s connection survived the sex offender’s incarceration.
“In emails to a contact listed as the ‘The Duke’, the convicted sex abuser wrote: “I have a friend who i think you might enjoy having dinner with„ her name is irina she will be london 20-24 [sic].”
In response, the former Duke of York appeared to reply: ‘Of course. I am in Geneva until the morning of 22nd but would be delighted to see her. Will she be bringing a message from you? Please give her my contact details to get in touch.’ […] Epstein later clarified the woman was ‘26, russian, clevere [sic] beautiful, trustworthy and yes she has your email’.”
“Andrew: How are you? Good to be free?
Epstein: …great to be free of many things”
Another Telegram report, we learn that, in another released email, Epstein claimed that Bill Gates caught an STD after having sex with Russian girls.
Epstein-Gates: Documents suggest their connection was much more extensive than previously known.
Epstein sent a ‘memo to himself’ on July 18 2013, where he writes about a falling out between the two.
“’TO add insult to the injury you them [sic] implore me to please delete the emails regarding your std, your request that I provide you antibiotics that you can surreptitiously give to Melinda and the description of your penis’, the email reads.
[…] The revelations about Gates offer the first public details of their relationship after they were photographed together multiple times in previous Epstein Files.”
The revelations are coming in non-stop, so stay tuned.
The Council of Europe has voted in favor of a resolution demanding a ban on so-called “conversion therapy,” including prayers regarding “gender identity or gender expression.”
On Thursday, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe voted in favor of the anti-conversion therapy resolution that was brought forward by U.K. Labour Party member and LGBT activist Katharine Helen Osborne.
According to the assembly’s website, the Socialist Group (SOC), the United European Left (UEL), and most of the liberal ALDE Group voted in favor of the motion, while the European People’s Party (EPP/CD) was divided on the issue. The European Conservatives (ECPA/ECR) almost unanimously rejected it.
The text of the resolution defines “conversion practices” or “conversion therapies” as “all measures or efforts aimed at changing, repressing, or suppressing a person’s sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression, based on the false belief that such core aspects of a person’s identity are pathological or undesirable or somehow able to change.”
The ban of so-called “conversion practices” would include praying for a person, as the resolution states that “[t]hese practices, aimed at promoting heterosexual attraction or aligning a person’s gender identity with their sex assigned at birth, include psychological or behavioural counselling, spiritual and religious rituals, aversion methods, as well as verbal abuse, coercion, isolation, forced medication, electric shocks, physical and sexual abuse.”
While local laws against “conversion therapy” often have exceptions for “abnormal sexual preferences” like pedophilia, the motion does not include such a stipulation.
The resolution also calls for the indoctrination of school children with LGBT ideology, as it demands “mandatory comprehensive sexuality education,” including “teaching on the diversity of sexual orientation, gender identity and expression and sex characteristics, with a view to preventing and countering social prejudice and misinformation.”
Children should learn to “identify and denounce” attempts of so-called “conversion practices.”
The Council of Europe is independent of the European Union, and its assembly comprises members of national parliaments from European countries. The resolution is non-binding, but governments, parliaments, and courts can use it as a basis for decision-making, and it applies pressure on local governments to pass laws that meet its demands.
Stefan Fuchs from the German Catholic newspaper Die Tagespost notes that the resolution “treats ‘religious practices’ such as prayer on the same level as abuse and torture methods.”
Parents, doctors, and pastors would be forced “to allow young people to undergo hormone therapy and so-called ‘gender reassignment’ surgery.”
“Criticism of this mutilation of young people is to be criminalized as an attack on the human rights of transgender people,” Fuchs wrote. “The resolution is a frontal attack on fundamental freedoms: the right of parents to educate their children, freedom of religion, the freedom of doctors and psychologists to choose their therapy, and, in general, the fundamental right to freedom of expression.”
Pro-family critics have denounced the resolution for violating the parents’ right to educate their children how they see fit.
ADF International lawyer Felix Böllman said, “Psychiatrists, parents, members of religious communities, and many others are being intimidated. The interference with freedom of expression, religion, and conscience is particularly serious: certain beliefs about sexuality and gender are being labeled as ‘wrong’ and are to be effectively suppressed, even though the ECHR also protects uncomfortable peaceful views.”
The Bureau of Prisons is facing its second legal challenge in the case of a transgender pedophile demanding various “gender affirming” treatments. Last year, a federal court in Washington ordered the BOP to provide Brian “Nani Love” Buckingham with speech therapy, laser hair removal, and facial feminization surgery, but Buckingham’s lawyers are claiming the services provided so far are inadequate.
As previously reported by Reduxx, Buckingham was first arrested in June of 2020 after being connected to a Discord account that was sharing child rape photos. Discord had received a report from a concerned user about abuse images that had been made public, and a human moderator verified the contents of the report and immediately notified the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC). Based on the IP address of the account associated with the image, the NCMEC determined the account was located in Washington and contacted state law enforcement.
A detective from the Washington State Patrol was assigned to the case to review the evidence from Discord, which included an image file depicting an adult man preparing to penetrate the anus of a young child.
Discord later surrendered all of the information belonging to the account the images had originated from, and Washington State Patrol was then able to confirm the owner of the account was Brian Buckingham of Neah Bay.
An additional package of media provided to police by Discord revealed two videos featuring Buckingham and a child victim that was later determined to be Buckingham’s own 10-year-old son.
🚨EXCLUSIVE🚨
The Bureau of Prisons has been ordered to provide a transgender pedophile with laser hair removal to alleviate his "gender dysphoria."
Brian "Nani Love" Buckingham is currently serving a 21-year sentence for sexually abusing his own son.https://t.co/wCvGm1OwLd
Continuing the investigation, the Washington State Patrol found that Buckingham had exchanged Discord messages expressing an interest in rape and sexually abusing animals and toddlers. Buckingham also shared child sexual abuse material with other Discord users, and even engaged in sexually exploitative chats with at least one user who identified themselves as being 13.
Buckingham was initially indicted on two counts – one of the production of child pornography, and one of the distribution of child pornography. But the indictment was later revised to include three counts of the production of child pornography, one count of the distribution of child pornography, and one count of aggravated sexual assault on a child.
On December 4, 2024, Buckingham waived his right to a trial and entered into a plea agreement, admitting to the production of child pornography and abusive sexual contact with a child. He was ultimately sentenced to 252 months in prison, and the court recommended that Buckingham serve his sentence at FCI Butner, an institution considered to be “friendly” to trans inmates.
Just prior to the sentence being formalized in that case, Buckingham had already begun to file a lawsuit against the Federal Bureau of Prisons and Trump administration officials for alleged violations of his human rights.
In a motion filed in April of 2025, Buckingham claimed that Bureau of Prisons had violated his Eighth Amendment rights and his rights under Section 2 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 by denying him access to “medically necessary care.”
Buckingham described himself as a “transgender female” in the motion, and claimed that he was at risk of irreparable harm if the accommodations were not provided to him.
Brian “Nani Love” Buckingham
On September 18, United States Magistrate Judge David Christel filed a report determining that Buckingham was “likely to succeed” on the merits of his claims that his Eighth Amendment rights against cruel and unusual punishment had been violated.
“Buckingham has presented evidence that she suffers from a serious medical need, gender dysphoria. She also has presented evidence that Defendants were aware of her need for the Consultations,” Judge Christel wrote, referring to Buckingham with feminine pronouns. “The evidence shows BOP healthcare providers at FDC SeaTac referred Buckingham for the Consultations, and then BOP healthcare providers at FCI Butner discontinued the requests for the Consultations without reason and summarily denied her request for the facial feminization consultation … The undisputed evidence shows the Consultations are medically necessary.”
Judge Christel then recommended Buckingham’s motion for a preliminary injunction be granted, and that an injunction ordering the Bureau of Prisons to provide him with the cosmetic consultations be issued. Explicitly included were those for laser hair removal, facial feminization surgery, and voice training.
United States District Court Judge Ricardo Martinez adopted Christel’s recommendations, and gave the Bureau of Prisons until December 12, 2025, to comply with the mandatory injunction.
But lawyers for Buckingham have since filed additional declarations in the case, complaining that the BOP has failed to comply with the order and provide Buckingham his requested “gender affirming care” consultations. Further, Buckingham’s attorneys allege the BOP has continued to violate his Eighth Amendment rights against cruel and unusual punishment by referring him to a psychiatrist who expressed uncertainty about his gender dysphoria diagnosis.
In a Motion to Show Cause filed on December 23, 2025, Buckingham’s attorneys asserted that the BOP had arranged Buckingham’s “speech therapy” consultations, but hadn’t delivered on the requests for facial feminization or laser hair removal.
The BOP reportedly tried to explain the lack of action by noting they did not have a contract with any laser hair removal providers, but Buckingham’s lawyers complained that the BOP had made no effort to contact third-party providers to comply with the order.
Instead, the BOP decided that Buckingham would be allowed to purchase a No-No brand personal hair removal device for his own use.
Further, the Motion to Show Cause notes that BOP arranged a consultation for Buckingham with a psychiatrist to “assess for the medical necessity of the requested gender-affirming procedures,” but the psychiatrist stated that he could not validate Buckingham’s previous diagnosis of gender dysphoria.
In his report on Buckingham, Dr. Edward Weidow concluded that there was “a distinct lack of evidence” that Buckingham’s “current requests for surgeries” were necessary. Noting that Buckingham presented with serious mental health issues that did not appear to be well-managed, Weidow continued: “I do not see gender-affirming surgery in this case … to be medically necessary … or advisable.”
Buckingham’s attorneys rejected Dr. Weidow’s assessment, asserting that “WPATH Standards of Care instruct that delaying or denying care ‘due to the presence of mental health problems may exacerbate symptoms’ … Accordingly, the WPATH Standards of Care do not support Dr. Weidow’s cursory conclusion that the existence of co-occurring mental health symptoms warrant denying Ms. Buckingham further gender-affirming care.”
The Motion to Show Cause concludes by recommending the Bureau of Prisons be held in civil contempt and heavily sanctioned for its apparent “failure” to provide Buckingham with the “gender-affirming care” ordered by the court, and suggests the BOP be forced to pay a noncompliance fine of $1,000 per day until Buckingham is given the consultations he demanded. Buckingham’s lawyers also requested the BOP pay the legal costs associated with filing the motion.
Buckingham’s case represents one of the first successful challenges made by a transgender inmate to the Trump administration’s recent executive orders.
In January of 2025, the administration moved to tighten federal prison policies affecting transgender inmates, directing the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Prisons to base housing assignments on inmates’ sex assigned at birth rather than “gender identity,” and barring the use of federal funds for “gender affirming” medical treatments for transgender inmates.
Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor appeared to exchange emails with paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein about a “beautiful girl”.
Three million files on Epstein have been released by the US Justice Department.
One document shows an alleged email exchange between Epstein and Andrew in April 2010, with Epstein telling the former prince he had “a friend who I think you might enjoy having dinner with”.
The pair disclosed dates she would be in London, the documents appear to show.
He said she’s 26, Russian, “beautiful, trustworthy and yes she has your email”.
Andrew allegedly responded: “Of course. I am in Geneva until the morning of 22nd but would be delighted to see her.”
He continued: “Will she be bringing a message from you? Please give her my contact details to get in touch.”
The email is signed off with: “A – HRH The Duke of York KG.”
One email appeared to show Andrew and Epstein talking about ‘a friend’ for the former duke to meet | USDEPARTMENTOFJUSTICE
Another email appeared to show Andrew inviting Epstein to Buckingham Palace in September 2010.
The former Duke of York emailed him: “I am just departing Scotland, should be down by 18:00. I’ll ring you when I get down if you can give me a number to ring.
“Alternatively, we could have dinner at Buckingham Palace and lots of privacy. A.”
Epstein responded: “Already in London, what time would you like me and [redacted]. We will also need/have private time.”
Another email exchanged showed Andrew inviting Epstein to Buckingham Palace | USDEPARTMENTOFJUSTICE
Andrew has also been named in the files, allegedly taking a flight with Epstein and convicted sex offender Ghislaine Maxwell.
The document shows a flight from TEB (Teterboro Airport) to TIST (St. Thomas Cyril E. King Airport) located in the British Virgin Islands.
Details state “JE, GM, ET, AP, Prince Andrew, Steve Burgess,” took a flight on February 9, 1999.
A flight left TIST with “JE, GM, ET, AP, Prince Andrew, Steve Burgess”, and others on board, on February 12, 1999.
The former Duke of York has previously said that he met Epstein in 1999 through Maxwell.
Andrew has always denied any wrongdoing, and being named in the files does not suggest any misconduct.
A 25-year-old South Sudanese migrant killed an 18-year-old woman in a fatal subway attack in Hamburg on Thursday evening, after seizing her and pulling her with him into the track bed in front of an incoming train. Both the victim and the perpetrator died at the scene. German police are investigating the case as a suspected homicide.
The incident occurred around 10 p.m. at Wandsbek Markt subway station. According to police, the victim and the perpetrator were independently present on the platform and did not appear to know each other. Investigators said the man suddenly approached the woman, seized her, and pulled her with him into the track bed as a train was entering the station. The motive remains unclear.
The German Red Cross provided psychological support to witnesses, while subway traffic on line U1 was suspended overnight and only resumed the following morning.
Authorities later confirmed that the perpetrator was a 25-year-old man from South Sudan who had entered Germany in mid-2024 through a humanitarian reception program run by Germany’s federal states. He reportedly held a valid residence permit and had been living in municipal accommodation in Hamburg. The victim was an 18-year-old woman from the Norderstedt area in Schleswig-Holstein. Her nationality has not been publicly disclosed.
According to witness accounts reported in German media, the man appeared intoxicated and was seen behaving erratically shortly before the attack. One witness, who said he did not observe the entire incident himself, alleged that the perpetrator grabbed the woman from the side and told her, “I’ll take you with me,” before both fell onto the tracks.
The incident prompted immediate reactions from political figures, calling for a full clarification of the circumstances. Alice Weidel, co-leader of the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD), wrote on X:
Terrible act in Hamburg: A South Sudanese man drags an 18-year-old woman in front of an incoming subway train with him. Both die. The circumstances of this crime must be fully and completely clarified. We must not get used to these ‘isolated cases’.
The killing comes amid renewed scrutiny following earlier railway deaths involving migrants. Only months earlier, a similar tragedy occurred in Lower Saxony, where a 16-year-old Ukrainian girl was pushed in front of a train in Friedland. An Iraqi asylum seeker was later linked to the case through DNA evidence. His asylum application had previously been rejected, and he was legally obliged to leave Germany at the time of the incident. Due to a diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia, the suspect was placed in a psychiatric institution instead of pre-trial detention.
